Legal Opinion

Harty v. Bye

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided April 14, 1971PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBryson, J.

This is an action on a written contract by plaintiff, a licensed well driller, to recover the unpaid balance of the contract price for drilling a well on defendant’s property. The plaintiff alleges that he performed all of the obligations required of him under the terms of the contract. The defendant admits the terms and execution of the contract but denies performance on the part of plaintiff and further denies that any sum of money is due plaintiff by defendant. By way of counterclaim, defendant demands judgment against the plaintiff under a provision in the contract for liquidated damages…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Medak v. HekimianOregon Supreme Court · 1965
  2. Springer v. Powder Power Tool Corp.Oregon Supreme Court · 1960
  3. Rushlight Automatic Sprinkler Co. v. City of PortlandOregon Supreme Court · 1950
  4. Kuzmanich v. United Fire & Casualty Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1966
  5. Quillin v. PeloquinOregon Supreme Court · 1964

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. Illingworth v. BushongOregon Supreme Court · 1984
  2. Kabil Developments Corp. v. MignotOregon Supreme Court · 1977
  3. Wright v. Schutt Construction Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1972
  4. Southworth v. OliverOregon Supreme Court · 1978
  5. Dean Vincent, Inc. v. McDonoughOregon Supreme Court · 1978

17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API